This problem will not go away until full guard is considered a neutral position like it should be. If you get a takedown great but you need to do something with it besides eating elbows and fighting off chokes.

I totally agree.

I don't think it will happen over night but in the next few years, hopefully were going to see more judges that actually have BJJ/grappling backgrounds that can recognize the significance of an offensive guard and weigh certain strikes/sub. attempts from guard/half-guard equally to comparable offensive techniques from top-control.

Guard is not a neutral position. The guy on top is winning for sure if the bottom guy isn't going for subs constantly or sweeps. I thought clay was losing but I knew how judges would react.

Being on top is winning. Look at koch vs lamas most of those bombs were thrown in guard then lifted his legs and unleashed some heat.

I'm just saying that many of these judges fail to understand that an offensive guard qualifies as effective grappling just as much as any other grappling technique and strikes delivered from a fighter maintaining his guard should be scored as significantly under effective striking as a standing strike.

As we've seen in this fight and many others, judges have a tendency to place way to much importance on scoring the length of time a fighter mantained top-control during a round. These incompetent judges are stealing rounds from the more active fighters and giving them to the guys that are obviously working the system by stalling in guard. In all their great wisdom, they've set the precedent that being in top-control for a long period of time actually qualifies as a form of offense that out-weighs all other scoring criteria.

Just like in BJJ, the guard should be considered a nuetral position in MMA, which means controlling your opponent in his guard for an extended period of time during a round should not be scored under the criteria of effective grappling or octagon control. The guard is somewhat of a stalemate position and simply being in someones guard or half-guard should not qualify as any form of "control" or "offense".

Wasa-B - Btw, has anyone had Clay in this much sub trouble on pure grappling alone? How much did Nate have? Seeing some earlier subs in his career but in the UFC, he's only been RNC after getting rocked.

Pretty impressive on Hioki's part imo esp after his past performance aginst Lamas which he has no close attempts?

Does Hioki have the best BJJ at FW?

Nate did not have clay in any trouble, but he was also never in trouble himself. That entire fight was a stalemate 30-30 draw imo.

Yes that is correct, kenny dropped him with a straight right(iirc) and huerta hit in with a knee before getting the RNC.

Diego sanchez also beat the hell out of clay from his back with elbows and was nearly robbed in that fight. I believe it was a split decision. Hilarious because diego deserved a 10-8 first and clearly won the 2nd and 3rd rounds too.

Yes Hioki has the best BJJ at FW. He molestes guys like baret yoshida and marlon sandro on the mat.

I think Hioki needs to develop more GNP. Like Okami, they do not take advantage of the positions they are in if they advance and open up, i do realize of course a guy like Hioki is technical and knows you can lose position and therefore move further back from a sub if you open up and lose position.

Hioki still has zero subs over 4 fights in the UFC though, but he has had everyone except Lamas in sub trouble? cant recall if he had mount on Lamas...

they've been saying that but the bottom line is that if its an issue, he's 4 fights into the UFC now so he has to recitify that on his own if that is the case. I thought he looked good against Clay, as said, no one has put Clay in that kind of sub trouble without rocking him. His striking looked better too last night, though it did look good against Bart, he dropped Bart with a jab......also Clay also admitted and the judges obviously were fapping to Arianny or something but Hioki hurt Clay a couple times with body shots, one was very early in R1 too where Clay actually bent over.

To your well-stated other points, though - I agree that it doesn't matter, in and of itself, where a fight happens, but what happens there....what I was saying is that it also matters how a fight got to where it is, ie. who wanted it there, and which fighter's will and skill prevailed.

Hioki's striking counted. Clay overcoming that to take the fight where he wanted counted. Hioki's activity on the bottom counted, but so did Guida's on the ground from on top (constant attempted guard passes and consistent, if not world-shattering, strikes).

Hioki didn't succeed in sweeps or (fully) in submissions. Guida did not succeed in guard passes or (fully) in strikes. That is, neither Hioki's submission attempts nor Guida's strikes succeed in ending the fight. I do think Guida completed more punches on the ground than Hioki got even close to completing submission attempts, though.

Anyway, the idea that Hioki fought well and closely, and that judging is subjective (ie. especially, what constitutes "danger" or "damage") is fine with me. I suppose even someone seeing things totally but honestly different than I and scoring it for Hioki is possibly reasonable. But the idea that Hioki losing was a "robbery" is out of left field, imo.

Btw, im not hating on Clay at all. The Gray fight was an abomination but he still has 3 finishes in his last 5 wins. Its MMA, sometimes, stalemates or "boring" ground sequences happen, that's grappling, that's MMA.

To your well-stated other points, though - I agree that it doesn't matter, in and of itself, where a fight happens, but what happens there....what I was saying is that it also matters how a fight got to where it is, ie. who wanted it there, and which fighter's will and skill prevailed.

Hioki's striking counted. Clay overcoming that to take the fight where he wanted counted. Hioki's activity on the bottom counted, but so did Guida's on the ground from on top (constant attempted guard passes and consistent, if not world-shattering, strikes).

Hioki didn't succeed in sweeps or (fully) in submissions. Guida did not succeed in guard passes or (fully) in strikes. That is, neither Hioki's submission attempts nor Guida's strikes succeed in ending the fight. I do think Guida completed more punches on the ground than Hioki got even close to completing submission attempts, though.

Anyway, the idea that Hioki fought well and closely, and that judging is subjective (ie. especially, what constitutes "danger" or "damage") is fine with me. I suppose even someone seeing things totally but honestly different than I and scoring it for Hioki is possibly reasonable. But the idea that Hioki losing was a "robbery" is out of left field, imo.

Yes, will matters but Clay did not impose his will on Hioki. He was completely neutralized on the ground and Hioki had all the significant moments though Clay was more active over the entire course but he still only got 1 half guard pass and nearly all of his GNP attempts were blocked or evaded. Hioki had more damaging GNP from his guard than Clay did, i think Hioki opened up a cut on Clay when he had mission control or whatever.

"Hioki's striking counted. Clay overcoming that to take the fight where he wanted counted."

- Hioki's volume of strikes landed should count more for simply taking the other guy down becaseu in itself, tds only take a fight to the ground, if there is no GNP or advancement or significant offense, it doesnt mean much, certainly not more than strikes landed standing.

"Hioki's activity on the bottom counted, but so did Guida's (constant attempted guard passes and consistent, if not world-shattering, strikes). Hioki didn't succeed in sweeps or (fully) in submissions. Guida did not succeed in guard passes or (fully) in strikes."

- Guida's passes are attempts offense but he failed in all of them exect 1. Again, nearly all of his GNP attempts did not land. That should be weighed lower than the significant submission danger Hioki put him in because a submission has a chance to end a fight, Clay couldnt even land any GNP and only got half guard once!

"That is, neither Hioki's submission attempts ended the fight nor did Guida's strikes. I did think Guida completed more punches on the ground than Hioki got even close to completing submission attempts, though. "

Clay's GNP was so insignificant imo and how could a few pitter shots be weighed as close as good fight ended threats (subs)? How can 1 or 2 arm GNP strikes be even counted as close to a locked and isolated kimura?

Wasa-B - Btw, im not hating on Clay at all. The Gray fight was an abomination but he still has 3 finishes in his last 5 wins. Its MMA, sometimes, stalemates or "boring" ground sequences happen, that's grappling, that's MMA.

Hioki still won though.

I hear what you're saying, but you bringing up "3 finishes in his last 5 wins" inadvertently underscores what people are complaining about.

Those 3 finishes happened in 2010/2011. The one against Shannon Gugerty was almost three years ago! Two straight years of lackluster decisions has killed his rep.

And seems that Rogan was pulling another "Kimora" pronounciation on Hioki, saying "Hey-oki" as if he was wanting to say "A-oki." ;p

at the press conference dana said he didn't watch it. was dealing with technical difficulties or some such shit. word is that he appeared facetious when he said he didn't watch it, as he was trying to follow the golden rule of "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all."

Reply Post

“This is the official website of the Mixed Martial Arts llc. Commercial
reproduction, distribution or transmission of any part or parts of this website
or any information contained therein by any means whatsoever without the prior
written permission is not permitted.”